Monthly Archives: May 2013

[Firstly, the usage of liberal in this context is done with the broadest, ideological definition the word in mind. To some of you, you’ll know this as “Deckersean”. That is to say, not political liberalism, economic or cultural–but the ideology itself that encompasses the three branches below it.]

There is one thing that will make a liberal-imperialist fly into a fury. This is because the ideology itself is built upon the suppression of its existence. That is the liberal antithesis. It comes in many forms, but as soon as it appears, the liberal-imperialist vanguards launch their countermeasures against their existential enemy. The pogroms against their antithesis include but are not limited to, arrogant marginalization, shows of contempt, appeals to authority, discursive bullying, legal sanctioning, Potemkin village construction, selective memory, and outright physical violence.

Liberalism, to its credit, has been by far the most successful of ideologies in their natural attempt to negate their negative. Over the past century, the socialists have wailed about the reabsorption of capitalist values while the clerics grieved the loss of divine virtue and moral behaviour. These examples show that each time a new strand of thought has broken through the iron cage of collective cognition–such as feminism–liberalism has bent itself just enough to accept the newcomer. The unique propensity to absorb seemingly antithetical strands of thought is the homogenous cold-rolled steel armour that protects the dominance of liberalism.